Antioxidant Buyers Face a Blend by Blend Reporting Test Before 29 August

India's Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) has finalised the product scope and the Product Control Number (PCN) methodology for its anti-dumping investigation into imports of certain antioxidants from China, South Korea and Singapore, giving importers and exporters until 29 August 2026 to file questionnaire responses in the prescribed format.

The clarification, issued on 14 August 2026 under Case No. AD(OI) 033/2026, follows the initiation of the probe on 24 June 2026 on an application filed by Vinati Organics Limited. After written comments from the domestic industry and other interested parties, and a hearing held on 6 August 2026 to discuss those submissions, the Authority has retained the product scope exactly as notified at initiation.

The product under consideration covers five antioxidants identified by CAS number, along with their equivalents and blends. These are Antioxidant 1010 (CAS 6683-19-8), pentaerythritol tetrakis(3-(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl) propionate); Antioxidant 1076 (CAS 2082-79-3), octadecyl-3-(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl)-propionate; Antioxidant 168 (CAS 31570-04-4), tris(2,4-di-tert-butylphenyl) phosphite; Antioxidant 1098 (CAS 23128-74-7); and Antioxidant L135 or 1135 (CAS 125643-61-0). The Authority has clarified that "equivalents" means alternate or company-specific brand names, a point that closes the door on relabelling as an escape route.

Commercially, this is a basket that sits at the heart of polymer stabilisation. AO 1010 and AO 1076 are workhorse hindered phenolic primary antioxidants used across polyolefin resins, packaging films, pipes and automotive compounds. AO 168 is the phosphite secondary antioxidant that is almost always paired with them to protect polymer melt during processing. AO 1098 finds use in polyamides, while L135 serves liquid-dosing applications. Because the two families are typically dosed together, the market moves in pre-mixed blends rather than single molecules, which is where the new codification framework becomes demanding.

What procurement and supply chain teams need to do now

For buyers and supply chain managers, the practical burden is documentary rather than tariff related, at least for the moment. Every transaction must now be reported under a code combining product type and antioxidant identity, so a straight AO 1010 shipment is reported as A1010 and an AO 1098 shipment as A1098. Blends carry a heavier load: each distinct blend must be reported by both its constituent antioxidants and the exact weight ratio, with constituents listed in descending order of share. A B215-type mix of AO 1010 and AO 168 in a 1:2 ratio becomes BA-1010-0168-1:2, and the same constituents in a different ratio count as an entirely separate PCN. Procurement teams should immediately pull twelve to eighteen months of import documentation, map every purchase order and bill of entry to the correct code, and verify with suppliers the exact blend ratios shipped, since specification sheets and commercial invoices often describe blends by brand name alone. Where a supplier declines to disclose ratios, that gap needs to be flagged early, because incomplete or inconsistent PCN reporting typically results in residual duty treatment, which is almost always the harshest rate in the final determination.

The Authority has recorded that the codes were framed because the cost difference between these product types exceeds five per cent, an acknowledgement that non-comparable grades cannot be lumped together when normal value is set against export price.

Both confidential and non-confidential versions of submissions must be filed on the SETU Portal within the timeline, and the notification states plainly that no further extension will be granted given the time-bound nature of trade remedy proceedings. Importers retain the right to seek product-specific exclusions with supporting evidence, but the window for shaping the dataset on which any duty is eventually calculated closes on 29 August.